Britain's feeble response
British government shows weakness, helplessness in face of Iranian audacity
Shlomo Papirblatt Ynetnews
Published: 04.02.07, 14:47 / Israel Opinion
The abduction of the British marines and sailors by Iranian forces in Iraq's territorial waters – according to Britain – is beginning to look like one of Britain's and the West's most embarrassing moments: A blundering weakness and helplessness on the British government's part vis-à-vis the defiance and audacity coming from Teheran.
The story resembles a disparaging script written with the sharp talent of a BBC series. An Iranian marine force surrounds the boat of 15 soldiers who are on a regular patrol of Iraqi waters.
Under the threat of firearms they surrender unconditionally, they are taken away, moved to Teheran, displayed on TV and publicly ridiculed. A headscarf covers the head of the only female soldier and her announcement, which is undoubtedly coerced, attacks the forceful policies of Britain and the US in Iraq.
In addition, senior Iranian officials are making announcements as if they are planning to put the soldiers on a show trial, an act that defies every international law.
Limited response
Meanwhile in London, as well as in other European capitals whose foreign policies are united, weak protest against Iran is being sounded - protests that clearly won't budge a single hair on the head of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. A complaint is being filed with the UN Security Council, but its recent resolutions are being treated as though written on ice during a heat wave. And that's it. This is where the boldness and response of those who sent the abducted soldiers to battle ends.
Is the initial instinct to fold and the helplessness against unflinching terror by an insane ruler once again working against the British government and its European allies?
I am not saying, heaven forbid, that the solution has to come from the arsenal of military responses at this point in time. There are other options, and they too are unequivocal in character.
Free on the streets of London
For example, it is well known that the Iranian ambassador is still walking freely on the streets of London, free to enjoy the theatre and excellent Indian restaurants, as are Iran's diplomatic representatives in other European countries.
They continue to come to work, according to rigid protocol prevalent between normal countries – as if it was such a country and as if nothing had occurred in the Persian Gulf. No one is threatening to take them to the nearest airport and to politely but firmly put them on the next plane back to Iran.
By the same token, Western diplomats are continuing to sip mineral water or grapefruit juice at cocktail parties in Teheran, and representatives of large European economic enterprises are rolling economic opportunities from side to side. Wouldn't a freeze on of all this activity hint to the sane people in the Iranian government that it's about time they do something about the radicals who are leading them by the nose?
It is incumbent on the leaders of the West to at least try, before they turn into a laughing stock.
These folks would find plenty of Company in London or DC:
ReplyDeleteEunuchs interact with each other during All Indian Eunuchs' convention in Bahucharaji
In the First 6 Seconds, she's telling her mates what Iwannajihad would look like with a couple of those bananas stuffed up his rectum.
ReplyDeleteBritain's feeble response...
ReplyDelete...echoes Olmert's feeble response when his military personnel were abducted, and America's acceptance of North Korea's nuke test after months of grandstanding about how such a test would be deemed unacceptable. A few thousand Jihadis with garage door openers and 155mm rounds haven't brought the West to its knees like this, it is the West's own handwringing in the face of media commentary on Gitmo, Abu Grahib, Madrid bombings, London tubeway bombings, Paris car-B-que, and the flying Imans. In fine, we're in the middle of a self-inflicted malaise, and the President ain't even wearing a cardigan sweater and talking about lust in his heart.
Unlike Carter, Saint Bush has never lusted for Bush.
ReplyDeleteOr, as Saint Jesse would say:
ReplyDelete"Stay Out the Bushes!"
(easier said than done for an Animal Bush Magnet like him.)
I wonder if Barrack the Magic Negro has lust in his heart?
ReplyDeleteThat would be Fairy Lust.
Barrack Husein Obama, the Magic Negro
ReplyDelete"Like a comic-book superhero, Obama is there to help, out of the sheer goodness of a heart we need not know or understand. For as with all Magic Negroes, the less real he seems, the more desirable he becomes. If he were real, white America couldn't project all its fantasies of curative black benevolence on him. "
ReplyDelete---
Lust has been displaced by Sheer Goodness.
Who Ranks higher on the (reciprocal) Bush-Lust Scale,
Saint Bush or the Magic Negro?
DEMS' NEXT DEBACLE
ReplyDeleteBy DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN
"...
The game will unfold predictably. The House and the Senate will compromise on the differences in their legislation funding the Iraq War; the end product, carrying poison-pill language that sets a deadline for troop withdrawal, will go to the White House to face an inevitable presidential veto. The Democrats' override attempt will fail - and a deadlock will ensue.
Then the Democrats will threaten to withhold funding for the war in Iraq unless the White House agrees to some form of deadline. The Bush administration will reply that it will never agree to a schedule for troop withdrawal - and both sides will glare at the other across an abyss.
But Bush will, inevitably, win the game of chicken. Pelosi and Reid have too much sense to be caught denying funding to troops in combat. Bush will make the price of obstinacy too great for the Democrats to bear.
Nobody will want to be in the position of cutting off funding and appearing to undermine the troops during a war.
But the consequences for Pelosi of a retreat will be serious: She'll leave behind her the party's left - who will never vote for funding without also mandating withdrawal. Pelosi will have to scramble and craft a majority with a combination of Republican votes and support from the center of her own party.
The speaker will probably wind up having to vote against the majority of her Democratic members. That spectacle won't be healthy for her future authority or control.
If the Republicans are smart, they will let Pelosi hang by her own rope and will force her to break her party apart by twisting arms for every last vote to pass a funding bill.
Inadvertently forced into triangulation, Pelosi and Reid will be the unwilling instruments of a schism in their party from which it may not recover until after the 2008 election. The fault lines between those willing to fund the war without a withdrawal amendment and those who insist on a date certain for a pullout will define a growing split within the party akin to the one that drove students into the streets of Chicago outside the party convention in 1968.
In the presidential race, Clinton and Obama will face moments of truth in deciding which side of the schism to occupy. They won't be able to fudge their positions any longer. Hillary, in particular, will have to come down for the war or against it - with lasting consequences for her candidacy.
The left will not forgive a vote to fund the war without requiring a withdrawal date - but the general electorate will not look kindly on pulling back funds during a war.
For his part, President Bush needs to stand firm as this process unfolds.
In that link in the First Post,
ReplyDeleteIt is describing what It would lust for if it were a he.
Ed,
ReplyDeleteMorris has said that Hillary (if she survives the primary) would win, despite the Polls, because the Polls are based on voting samples in previous elections.
He Posits that when Ophra calls the single girls to arms in the last two weeks of the General Election, masses of Girls who have not voted in the past will register and vote for Hillary.
That was my gut feeling 6 years ago.
Ask yourself, how many women do you know, (mostly single, esp divorced and single)that would vote for Hillary simply because she is (putatively) a woman?
Leave it to Ms T to hijack the start of a thread w/sexual innuendo.
ReplyDeleteEd,
ReplyDeleteHow can Bush be expected to stand firm if he's never had lust in his heart?
It is difficult to remain firm without some smidgen of lust in the heart.
ReplyDeleteYes, Ms Clinton could mobilize a whole new echelon of voters that are not factored into the current equations.
hmmm, the blood lust continues, the yearning for war. Interesting that Doug and teresita are adding in some sex too.
ReplyDeleteWashington hurting British bid to free crew
Tough words from U.S. highlight rift between White House and Downing Street
DOUG SAUNDERS
"LONDON -- The Iranian prisoner crisis revealed a widening schism between Britain and the United States yesterday as U.S. leaders called for tough action and British officials confirmed that they are trying to free their 15 imprisoned sailors by quietly reaching a compromise with Tehran.
British officials believe that Iran is not seeking a prisoner exchange or other further bounty in exchange for the sailors, who have been imprisoned for 10 days, and they are hoping the crisis can be resolved peacefully in the next few days.
As two more British sailors were shown last night in another Iranian broadcast reading confessions and a small crowd of radical students in Tehran threw rocks and firecrackers at the British embassy there, British diplomats exchanged letters with the Iranian foreign ministry seeking a conciliatory end to the standoff.
Officials in London said that they believe their "confidence-building" operations, in which they offer to guarantee the Iranian government that British vessels will not stray into Iranian waters, offer the best hope of winning the freedom of the sailors and marines who have been in custody since they were seized by Iran's Republican Guards on March 23. Iran says the sailors had strayed into Iranian waters. Britain says they remained in Iraqi waters, where they are allowed to operate in support of the war in Iraq.
"We are anxious that this matter be resolved as quickly as possible, and that it be resolved by diplomatic means, and we are bending every single effort to that. . . . We are in direct bilateral communication with the Iranians," British Defence Minister Des Browne told reporters yesterday.
But Britain's delicate diplomatic efforts were set back by U.S. President George W. Bush, who made a statement Saturday in which he characterized the imprisoned sailors as "hostages" -- a phrase that Britain has been carefully avoiding to prevent the crisis from becoming a broader political or military conflict.
"The British hostages issue is a serious issue because the Iranians took these people out of Iraqi waters, and it's inexcusable behaviour," Mr. Bush said in response to a reporter's question during a press conference at the Camp David retreat.
He had reportedly promised not to raise the issue of the sailors, as British officials worry that the entry of the United States into this crisis could cause it to escalate into an irreconcilable confrontation.
Other U.S. officials have been even less amenable to the British approach. John Bolton, who until recently was Mr. Bush's ambassador to the United Nations, has appeared on British TV describing the British approach as "pathetic."
Mr. Bush stressed that the United States would not turn over Iranian officials it had arrested in Iraq earlier this year on accusations that they were supporting insurgents, saying he supported Prime Minister Tony Blair's view that "there were no quid pro quos. The Iranians must give back the hostages. They're innocent, they were doing nothing, and they were summarily plucked out of water."
But British officials say that a prisoner exchange has never been offered or suggested by Iran, and that Mr. Bush's words could cause harm by putting the Iranians in a position from which they cannot back down if it becomes a major confrontation with their long-time enemy, the United States."
"Interesting that Doug and teresita are adding in some sex too."
ReplyDelete---
You know us Conservatives like the back of your Hand(job), Ash.
Can you point to any BLOOD lust in the posts above?
ReplyDelete(your lively [if more than slightly skewed] immagination does not count)
...I didn't mean to imply that the bananas would be numerous or large enough to cause physical trauma.
ReplyDeleteJohn Bolton is unemployed.
ReplyDeleteNo longer a representitive of the United States Government.
He does not support US Foreign Policy with regards North Korea, nor Iran for that matter.
He does not respect a US ally's diplomatic track in resolving this crisis.
He does not support the current Mission of the US Government and its' allies, rather than soldiering on for the Cause, he speaks his mind.
Undermining US and British Governmental attempts at accomplishing the Mission.
John Bolton, the "Underminer"
Yes indeedy, in his appearance on the Dennis Miller Show, Mr Bolton did indeed bolt from the Bush idolatry ideal.
ReplyDelete...but he does still have that Bushy Mustache.
For some of us, Bush idolatry boils down to Lust.
ReplyDeleteHey Ash, could you check that and make sure he did not say "Phallic" instead of "pathetic?"
ReplyDeleteHe IS a conservative, you know.
Doug said...
ReplyDeleteCan you point to any BLOOD lust in the posts above?
Well, the meme in this thread (gosh look at the title "grovelling") and the others since this crisis began has been one urging the use of steel, war, toughness and all that macho response shit. I'd say many are chomping at the bit to dish it out hard on Iran - blood lust.
Ms Teresita will not forget that you capitalized "Doug," but not "teresita."
ReplyDelete...fourskinned is fourarmed.
I have read a multitude of Conservative opinions calling for a more Steely Response that did NOT call for Military action.
ReplyDeleteLedeen for instance, has been calling for more assertive/aggressive NON-Military action.
Why should we do ANY Business w/Brazil, for instance, or let ANY Brazilians into our Country, until they reverse their stance on unlimited trade w/Tehran?
ReplyDeleteMeant to say:
ReplyDelete"Ledeen for instance, has been calling for more assertive/aggressive NON-Military action. "
FOR AT LEAST SIX (6) YEARS, and counting.
"Dish it out Hardon Iran"
ReplyDelete---
It's called "projection," Ash.
Get thee to a shrink.
Ash: hmmm, the blood lust continues, the yearning for war. Interesting that Doug and teresita are adding in some sex too.
ReplyDeleteWe're not so much yearning for war as we are helplessly watching the unfolding of another "Vietnam Syndrome". We find ourselves mired in another civil war in Asia, winning every battle but losing the war for the hearts and minds of our own people. The scale of this conflict is comparable to Vietnam, only our advanced medical techniques and logistics have prevented us from taking 10,000 KIA, and only the fact that we aren't drafting men to fight is preventing large scale riots in the campuses and streets. The first lesson on the limits of imperial power wasn't enough, we're back for another scoop.
More specifically,
ReplyDelete"projection of ailienated self-potential."
The shrink will be able to explain that to you to good effect.
hey, we can all play the pun - the lowest form of humor.
ReplyDeleteThose folks just do not support the President and his Polies in the Region, ash.
ReplyDeleteThey do not track well with the implementation of the Iraq Study Groups reccomendations. From training and equipping the Iraqi Army to participating in those Regional talks with Syria and Iran.
The realities of the Hamdan Decision by the Supremes and the subsequent legislation has shown the Mohammedan Wars, the Clash of Civilizations for what they truely are. Local civil wars, thus falling under treaty obligations agreed to in Article 3 of the Geneva Accords.
The setbacks in negotiating a settlement with Tribal Elders in Pakistan, puts people on edge. Right now on FOX it is a segment. We were on the issue two years ago, and lo and behold, doug and I were on target, when not deleted by a blog administator.
To paraphrase whit, a fellow would have to be blind or dumb to not see it, the trends all around.
So the desire lash out, bring matters to a head bursts forth.
Because, in the long run, it could be the most economical way forward. Pay the bill now, rather than later, when the compounded interest, payable in blood, becomes due.
It is a position that has merit.
You got that right T.
ReplyDeleteThe "right" simply mocked the NY Times, et al for seeming to imply that catastrophic injury is worse than death.
...thereby IGNORING the extent and number of catastrophic injuries.
---
...and one officer I read about mentioned that from his perspective, it WAS worse than death.
But he is soldiering on, given that he has a family, and more that that, a steely soul.
You can play the punda, Ash, speak for yourself.
ReplyDeleteAnd, 'Rat should be understood to mean more blood on BOTH sides.
ReplyDelete...but then again, you don't believe in sides, in terms of right or wrong, better, or worse.
"others since this crisis began has been one urging the use of steel, war, toughness and all that macho response shit. I'd say many are chomping at the bit to dish it out hard on Iran - blood lust."
ReplyDeletethe blood lust continues
the yearning for war
Know the enemy, know yourself
“Our dear Imam ordered that the occupying regime in Al-Qods [Jerusalem] be wiped off the face of the earth. This was a very wise statement. The issue of Palestine is not one on which we could make a piecemeal compromise. … This would mean our defeat. Anyone who would recognize this state [Israel] has put his signature under the defeat of the Islamic world.” - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, October 26, 2005
“If one day, the world of Islam comes to possess the weapons currently in Israel's possession --on that day this method of global arrogance would come to an end. This is because the use of a nuclear bomb in Israel will leave nothing on the ground, whereas it will only damage the world of Islam.” - Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, Former Iranian President, December 14, 2001
“Islam makes it incumbent on all adult males, provided they are not disabled or incapacitated, to prepare themselves for the conquest of countries so that the writ of Islam is obeyed in every country in the world... those who study Islamic Holy War will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world.” - Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini
...Propaganda and subversion are the very means employed against the West and Judeo-Christian civilization, and Islamists have shown themselves to be brilliantly adept at manipulating the gullible and uninformed western media (westerners) in pursuit of their aims of world domination.
The concept of jihad is not something now discarded by Islam as a quaint belief appropriate to the distant past. On the contrary, it is a cardinal belief in the 21st century for Moslems based upon Koranic injunctions. It is believed in by millions of Moslems around the Third world, as much as by Moslems living in America, Britain, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. It is a belief, passionately held, that one day the entire world will become Islamic and accept completely the will of Allah. It is nearly impossible for sophisticated and secularized Western and European elites to understand or accept such medieval concepts, let alone the idea that a religious war is being waged against them.
Well, doug, when Poppa Soc Assad killed those 50,000 people in Hama, how mant lives did he save?
ReplyDeleteLives not lost to the Muslim Brotherhood's Revolution?
There are US National Interests, doug.
The Mission, it becomes a variable from time to time, doesn't it?
Who sets the Goalposts?
That is what the debate comes down to. The Congress or the President, who gets to define the parameters of success or loss?
In the previous thread, Ms T said...
ReplyDelete"Should the Republican Guard try their shennanigans with a US frigate, interdicting and diverting supplies of gasoline bound for Iran would be indicated, with the percentage of seized vessels rising every week the hostage crisis continued."
---
No Blood there.
...unless the Iranians continue to display their stupid ways, in which case EVERY Iranian Ship in the vicinity should be sunk, ala "Praying Mantis"
(and the praying Muzzies)
ala akbar, save my stinking ass.
DR: The realities of the Hamdan Decision by the Supremes...
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of SCOTUS they just ruled that the EPA can't blow off regulating C02 with a hand wave, they need to back up that failure to regulate with documentation. I'm not debating whether that is right or wrong, but I want to point out that it will crimp the approval of any more coal power plants, and that trend will bump right into the NIMBY trend of dragging out the permit process for nuke plants. Something's gotta give, or people will be paying 20-30 cents a kilowatt-hour.
Desert Rat wrote:
ReplyDelete"Because, in the long run, it could be the most economical way forward. Pay the bill now, rather than later, when the compounded interest, payable in blood, becomes due.
It is a position that has merit."
There certainly is some merit to the view that it is a clash of civilizations, that the problem is Islam itself, but I don't thing the preponderance of evidence tilts the table in favor of eradicating those of that faith. When balancing the 'economics' of the way forward, especially vis a vis Iran, the cost of full engagement is very high and the payoff difficult to ascertain. the coddled public has little taste for delayed gratification and that ambivalence greatly diminishes the chance of success in such a long and costly game. Isn't the art of politics the art of the possible or some such homily?
And, a grid or refining chain running at 100% has ZERO tolerance for "disruption."
ReplyDeletethe cost of full engagement is very high and the payoff difficult to ascertain. "
ReplyDelete---
Black or White thinking, Ash.
(a characteristic of one who regularly practices projection)
Many other intermediate options are available.
Other options have been addressed here, you choose not to respond to them, and lapse back into your broken record behavior of
ReplyDelete"how conservatives really are"
I tink, ash, that you and the President are on the same page.
ReplyDeleteWhat the Iranians have done to date, has not been "enough".
The Nimitz set sail today, with great fanfare. It'll take, what, three weeks or so to get to the Gulf of Oman?
Today, the United States has just 183 bombers in its entire arsenal,
So those carrier aircraft would be critical, to have three carriers on station, at once ...
Plus the Frenchies.
The Navy has said the the Nimitz is the relief for Eisenhower, and there would not be any overlap of duties. A week or so ago.
defense.com says:
"The new battle group will be in position by late April, but there will be no overlap with the Eisenhower, and the number of U.S. carriers in the area would stay at two, a navy official said on condition of anonymity.
"If anything, there would be a point where there is only one in the region," the official said, on condition of anonymity.
The Stennis and the Eisenhower wound down their show of force involving 15 warships in the Gulf on March 29.
The two-carrier deployment in the Gulf was the highest level of U.S. naval presence in the gulf since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003.
If the balloon does not go up, then with three carriers available, it won't be goin' up soon.
The planets are aligned to maximum effect.
Is it the Age of aQuarius?
Doug: And, a grid or refining chain running at 100% has ZERO tolerance for "disruption."
ReplyDeleteAs it stands now, the Iranian regime sells gas to the restive populace at 40 cents on the dollar. That means not only that they lose money with every barrel of oil distilled, but if they take refinery capacity down for maintenance, all that money is flushed down the toilet too. The result can only mean more and more dependence on imports, which ought to make them more and more polite when the USA has three carriers in their front yard mud puddle.
Ahhh. Ms T, such linear thinking
ReplyDeleteThe Iranians subsidize the gasoline.
They cannot cut the subsidies, they bleed cash with each gallon consumed.
But in Iran, the Presidents' and Mullahs base are donkey cart people, not drivers. Not the middleclass auto owners. Not the bus drivers union
Strike the gasoline, the Mullahs will praise allah! At least for a while.
And, a grid or refining chain running at 100% has ZERO tolerance for "disruption."
ReplyDeleteGood for the goose and the gander?
US refinery capacity is running at 100%, doug.
Westcoast refineries cannot process 100% of Alaska crude.
Panama pipeline is running, west to east, at 100% capcity 24/7.
Just one of many choke points in the world. Targeting US infrastructure could easily follow overt US strikes against Iran.
The US could ill afford the disruption, though it would weather it.
“This is just an IED and an ambush and a reaction — that’s all it was — but it’s got political overtones and military overtones,”
ReplyDeleteThe future of MarSOC
DR: But in Iran, the Presidents' and Mullahs base are donkey cart people, not drivers. Not the middleclass auto owners. Not the bus drivers union
ReplyDeleteThe Philippines has a per capita income $3,000 less than Iran, yet I can tell you from tales of family woes over there that the high prices for gas are really hurting, such that I must provide a subsidy so a nephew can keep going to college. Iran is much less oriented toward "donkey cart people" than you think, and the subsidy itself has made a large swath of people vulnerable to any price hikes. Squeeze a little and the whole structure will come crashing down.
Maybe, Ms T, maybe.
ReplyDeleteMaybe we'll get to see, maybe not.
As to their "standard of living" I can only relate the photos of Bam, post earthquake, as to the quality of vehicles used in the rescues.
But that would start a war with Iran alright, a naval blockade.
What is the next step that the Iranians take in the escalation stairway?
re: John Bolton is unemployed.
ReplyDeleteWhat's this crap? I guess it felt good writing.
He is unemployeed, is he not?
ReplyDeleteUnable to be confirmed by the GOP majority controlled Senate, Mr Bolton left Federal employment and hit the talk show circut, a self employeed, unemployeed author and pundit.
A Pundit that derides the Bush Administration, US allies and their diplomatic efforts with Iran and North Korea.
Undermining those selfsame US policies chances for success, with his vocal and authoritive protestations of the inadequentcies of those policies.
DR: But that would start a war with Iran alright, a naval blockade. What is the next step that the Iranians take in the escalation stairway?
ReplyDeleteNaturally they would launch Silkworms at oil tankers belonging to Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Iraq, Kuwait, which would require a few thousand sorties to take out of the picture, with oil touching $100 in the meantime. But these aren't low-tech Scuds that can be hidden in a ditch, they have all sorts of associated fire control stuff. And this action will put Europe and China on our side in the UN like no other, because it will be mostly their oil that's being interrupted. And the pauperized Iran will be unable to schedule payments to Putin for services rendered, which would totally isolate them. Then we could proceed to demand they halt refinement of uranium.
I do not see the retaliation occuring on the Gulf, where the Iranians know they'll lose.
ReplyDeleteBut in Iraq, Lebanon, France & England, Panama, Mexico & the West & Gulf Cosast refineries. Except those that can process Venezuelan heavy crude.
"But in Iraq, Lebanon, France & England, Panama, Mexico & the West & Gulf Cosast refineries."
ReplyDeleteIranian Retaliation Against US Strikes p.36
The Options if Diplomacy Fails
bobalharb,
ReplyDeleteHmm...I don't know. Now, of course, it will torment me day and night until I do. Gee, thanks!
;-)
John Bolton is employed by the American Enterprise Institute.
ReplyDeleteHope Mr Bolton has a long tenure there.
ReplyDeleteLike doug said, when a grid or system is operating at near 100% capacity, it does not take much to knock it out of kilter.
ReplyDeleteHere, there, anywhere.
The closer one lives to the earth, the shorter the fall to it.
I predicted at the BC, in July or August last, that Mr. Bolton's dissatisfaction with Dr. Rice's handling of the Israel-Lebanon war would remove him from government service.
ReplyDeleteMr. Bolton's reticence to name names at this point may indicate two things. First, Mr. Bolton would not wish to arm the Democrats with inside information that would be used to undermine the mission in Iraq. Last, look for a book next summer, comfortably published prior to the election. No doubt, Mr. Bolton knows some things that could do harm to both Republicans and Democrats.
elijah,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the link.
The Iranian regime must appreciate that initial military action against it will offer the chance of survival, if the conflict is limited to the region. I'm thinking of Saddam's squandered opportunity for rehabilitation after Gulf War I.
If Iran takes the conflict outside the region, say into the United States, then, there will be no chance for its survival at all. Despite our many flaws, the American public would lynch any politician asking for armistice after an Iranian attack on the homeland. So, if the Iranians are planning a retaliatory hit on American soil, it had better be potent enough to take the United States out of the game, instantly.
possumtater,
ReplyDeleteNow, that is a bad hair day!
;-)
bobalharb,
ReplyDeleteI think it will take the passing of a generation.
The "Company" when I was in , was THE top dog. We trumped everyone else in getting what we wanted and there was that arrogant air of invincibility.
Now the entire intelligence community has been revamped and they're not the lead dog.
And you know what they say, " If you ain't the lead dog the view never changes"
This is just my personal opinion removed by 28 years, and I'll admit I did not read the article.
I do think that as David V.Hansen that the world is at one of those large demarcations in man's history. Where the CIA ends up in the food chain is anyones guess. There are some huge egos in DC and the turf battles rival that of the legendary five mafia families.
This is so NOT NOT PC.
ReplyDeleteConservapedia
Edits/new pages must be family-friendly, clean, concise, and without gossip or foul language.
When referencing dates based on the approximate birth of Jesus, give appropriate credit for the basis of the date (B.C. or A.D.). "BCE" and "CE" are unacceptable substitutes because they deny the historical basis.
No Trish,
ReplyDeleteCarter and Clinton did the real damage.
Carter because he was and is a stupid peanut farmer from Georgia and Clinton because is a Commie mole with a wife who has all the charm of Lady MacBeth and all the dangers associated with someone with a radical agenda who lusts for power.
Trish,
ReplyDeleteAre you a spokesperson for the left?
What exactly do you do?
Plus why on earth would anyone want to be involved in the sewer in DC? I know , money and power.
ReplyDeleteThe entire government is totally fucked up, top to botom and in the middle.
I know you'd rather hear from Ramsy Clark and Jane Fonda than Donald Rumsfeld.
Mr Rumsfeld was at the "Border Infrastructure and Continental Prosperity" at the North American Forum in Banff, Canada, last September and is scheduled to be at the next meeting of the North American Forum that is set for Oct. 12-14 in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico. Wonder if he'll reschedule?
ReplyDeleteAlso at the meeting, last September:
"...Secretary of State George Shultz, who serves as co-chairman of the North American Forum, former Central Intelligence Agency Director R. James Woolsey, former Immigration and Naturalization Services Director Doris Meissner, North American Union guru Robert Pastor, former Defense Secretary William Perry, former Energy Secretary and Defense Secretary James Schlesinger
North American Border Infrastructure
Can a North American Defense Force be far behind>
This little excerpt captures perfectly the knowledge base of much of media
ReplyDelete“KIMBERLY SHRUM grips a Smith & Wesson .357 Magnum revolver and aims at a target 25 yards away.
Bang.
A hot shell casing hits the floor, joining hundreds of others littering the concrete at Jackson Arms Indoor Shooting Range in South San Francisco.
Shrum centers herself and aims again.”
False but accurate reporting at the local "San Mateo County Times", up there around south San Fransisco...
ReplyDeleteWhere they wear flowers in their hair.
Not as part of a Ghillie Suit
The past week has seen some interesting developments as the Iraqi government and Coalition ramp up the Baghdad Security Plan. Al Qaeda in Iraq conducted three major mass casualty attacks nationwide. Nearly half of the U.S. forces devoted to the surge have now been deployed in Iraq as the Iraqi security forces and U.S. continue to assume control over the neighborhoods inside Baghdad and reorganize the command structure in the belts around Baghdad.
ReplyDeleteDeaths in Iraq have increased by fifteen percent from February to March as al Qaeda in Iraq adjusts its tactics to deal with the new security plan.
Bill Roggio's Fourth Rail
So I guess at this North American diddy bop we'll probably be hearing from Mr. Rumsfeld....again....that never thing is always such a long time.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the update DR I'll be looking for his reappearence
In one of those attacks didn't the terrorists use two children sitting in the back seat of the car as decoys?
ReplyDeleteThen the AQ abandon the car and blew it up with the kids inside.
I wonder if they told the kids they were going to Whabbi-World?
Yep, there goes the vestage of US soveereignty being co=opted away by the Skull and Crossbone Cabal as well as, well check out all the closed one world power groups putting this transnational no-more-US-unique-sovereinity together:
ReplyDeleteElite Structures: Membership Cross-fertilization, and Free Trade Corporatism
Over the past few days I have compiled biographies of the 2006 North American Forum participants. Among attendees there's considerable overlap between certain elite organizations: Council on Foreign Relations, 16 (George P. Shultz, Carla A. Hills, Kenneth W. Dam, Daniel W. Fisk, Carla A. Hills, Ronald F. Lehman II, Doris Meissner, Robert A. Pastor, William J. Perry, Donald H. Rumsfeld, James R. Schlesinger, William Schneider, David G. Victor, Jane Wales, R. James Woolsey, Andrés Rozental); Pacific Council on International Policy, 8 (Thomas P. d'Aquino, Berel Rodal, Ronald F. Lehman II, Doris Meissner, Robert A. Pastor, William J. Perry, Jane Wales, Andrés Rozental); Canadian Council of Chief Executives, 6 (Thomas P. d'Aquino, Richard L. George, Paul J. Hill, James S. Kinnear, Harold N. Kvisle, Ronald N. Mannix); Trilateral Commission, 5 (E. Peter Lougheed, Wendy K. Dobson, Gordon Smith, Carla A. Hills, William J. Perry); Canadian Institute of International Affairs, 4 (Wendy K. Dobson, John English, Roger Gibbins, John P. Manley); World Affairs Council of Northern California, 3 (George P. Shultz, William J. Perry, Jane Wales) Canada West Foundation, 3 (Brian A. Felesky, Roger Gibbins, James K. Gray); Alfalfa Club, 3 (George P. Shultz, Donald H. Rumsfeld, James R. Schlesinger); Bilderberg Group, 2 (Kenneth W. Dam, William J. Perry); Bohemian Grove, 2 (George P. Shultz, R. James Woolsey).
With 6 attendees, the Canadian Council of Chief Executives (CCCE) was also the organizer of this year's North American Forum. The formidable collective of 150 CEOs from the largest transnational corporations in Canada were co-sponsors of the Independent Task Force on North America. In CCCE's previous incarnation they were known as the Business Council on National Issues (BCNI) — formed in 1976 "by the CEOs of US-based Imperial Oil and Noranda," and having 30 original members. Big names such as "Air Canada, AT&T, Bechtel, Bombardier, Canadian Pacific, Cargill, Dupont, General Motors, Hewlett-Packard, Loram, MacMillan Bloedel, Mitsubishi, Monsanto, Nestlé, Northern Telecom, Petro Canada and Placer Dome."
The BCNI "effectively determines social and economic policy for the country," wrote Murray Dobbin in 1998 (The Myth of the Good Corporate Citizen: Canada and Democracy in the Age of Globalization, 176). They represent a new "enlightened business class" formed for the purpose of transforming public policy; consolidating enough power to "become virtually a parallel government" (Dobbin, 167). Similar to the Bilderberg's role in directing the integration of Europe, the CCCE were the hidden persuaders behind the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and NAFTA. On BCNI/CCCE, AllExperts has this
All the notable secret world running organizations are plannning our future.
You are welcome, habu.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with this North America stuff is that the "Standard" drops to the lowest common denominator.
Mexico City still being the world's largest metroplex, I think.
By Sen. Russ Feingold
ReplyDeleteAs Congress debates the war in Iraq, the congressional debate over Somalia 14 years ago has some surprising parallels. Without question, Somalia in 1993 differs in many ways from Iraq in 2007, from the scope of the mission to the reason for that mission in the first place. What hasn't changed, however, is Congress' constitutional power to end a military mission, and its ability to use that power without endangering the safety of our brave troops. ...
...
...some supporters of the Iraq war suggest falsely that efforts to cut funding for the war are a threat to our troops in the field. But in 1993, senators overwhelmingly supported successful efforts to cut off funding for a flawed military mission. Defenders of the Iraq war pretend that cutting off funds for the war is the same as cutting off funds for the troops, and raise the specter of troops being left on the battlefield without the training, equipment and resources they need. Every member of Congress agrees that we must continue to support our troops and give them the resources and support they need. And every member of Congress should know that we can do that while at the same time ending funding for a failed military mission. That was clearly understood in October 1993, when 76 senators voted for an amendment, offered by Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, to end funding for the military mission in Somalia effective March 31, 1994, with limited exceptions.
None of those 76 senators, who include the current Republican leader and whip, acted to jeopardize the safety and security of U.S. troops in Somalia. All of them recognized that Congress had the power and the responsibility to bring our military operations in Somalia to a close, by establishing a date after which funds would be terminated.
The same day that the Senate voted on the Byrd amendment, 38 senators -- myself included -- supported an even stronger effort to end funding for Somalia operations. The amendment offered by Sen. John McCain on Oct. 15, 1993, would have eliminated funding for operations in Somalia immediately, except for funds for withdrawing troops or for continuing operations if any American POWs/MIAs were not accounted for. The mostly Republican senators who supported the McCain amendment were not disregarding the safety of our troops, or being indifferent to their need for guns, ammunition, food and clothing. They were supporting an appropriate, safe, responsible proposal to use Congress' power of the purse to bring an ill-conceived military mission to a close without in any way harming our troops.
The Bill has not yet entered the Conference Committee, since they all be on Spring Break in DC.
”They” ARE here
ReplyDeleteHere, there, everywhere.
ReplyDeleteCriminals or enemy combatants?
... announced today the arrest of MAHMUD FARUQ BRENT, also known as “Mahmud Al Mutazzim,” on a criminal complaint charging him with conspiracy to provide material support or resources to the Lashkar-e-Taiba foreign terrorist organization.
It's good that we took down his Cell of twelve. A squad, really. As common criminals. As per Mr JFKerry's campaign pledge, to criminalize the "War on Terror".
The truth of the perspective is reinforced with the ambush reaction of the Marines in Afghanistan. By firing into and "attacking the ambush" they behaved as we trained in my younger days.
Today such tactics are borderline criminal. Not how the Army National Guard does things, and they seem to set the standard.
From bob's mexico terror story
ReplyDeleteIn the Iraqi videos, however, the aggressors use knives to cut off their victims' heads. In the Mexican video, the man is strangled by twisting a cord tied to metal rods until the pressure cuts through his neck.
The video appears to portray the aggressors as vigilantes. One comment posted on the site from a man who identifies himself as a 26-year-old from Mexico said, 'That's how justice is served!'
The Feb. 6 killings at two police stations in Acapulco were among the most brazen attacks since Calderon's crackdown. Witnesses said the killings by more than a dozen men were videotaped by the assailants, although authorities have never found any footage.
Federal authorities have said they were investigating whether some of the slain officers had ties to drug traffickers, and whether the killings were meant to settle scores between the Gulf and Sinaloa drug cartels. No was has been charged with the killings.
In apparent attempts to terrorize those who oppose them, the gangs have placed severed heads on public display with threatening notes including one that read, 'See. Hear. Shut Up. If you want to stay alive.'
In the most gruesome case, gunmen burst into a nightclub and rolled five heads onto the dance floor.
No political purposes there.
"Today, the United States has just 183 bombers in its entire arsenal,"
ReplyDelete---
Vs in WWII, prior to the P-51, losing and building 10 or more a DAY.
150 IN Half a month.
...but at least most of our bombers are less than 40 years old, and it would only take a decade or two to come up with a new one.
Assuming it could be designed and built in a Carbon-Neutral fashion.
"No political purposes there. "
ReplyDelete---
And you can't prove they were Arab radicals directly related to bin Laden.
Lacking that, any action taken against them would be "borderline criminal."
Habu,
ReplyDeleteThey might not be Commies, but they pose more of a danger to our future than did that list of FDR Commies posted for us.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTeresita mentioned we'd still be America, no real change.
ReplyDelete...as tho she can name any none Anglo-Judeo-Christian based cultures that aren't in the sewer or headed their fast.
"non," "there"
ReplyDeleteNo one home.
Minutes after announcing its sale to Mr. Zell, Tribune said it would be selling the Chicago Cubs, for which it paid $20.5 million more than 25 years ago.
ReplyDeleteA Chicago native, Mr. Zell is already a minority owner of the team’s South Side rivals, the White Sox. Major League Baseball rules prevent an investor from owning stakes in more than one club. Previously, The New York Post reported that Mr. Zell has declined to say which team he would keep should his bid succeed.
The Tribune’s media columnist, Phil Rosenthal, found in hindsight a potential hint that his parent company would sell the team: This year’s marketing slogan is “Play like there’s no tomorrow.”
“This transition will not impact our on-field performance,” John McDonough, Cubs president and chief executive, said in a statement. “We expect to compete and win — our goal of bringing a World Series championship to Cubs fans everywhere hasn’t changed.”
The team is considered to be one of the nation’s top franchises in professional sports, with steady TV revenue and a passionate fan base. Last year, Forbes valued the Cubs at $448 million, making it the fifth-most valuable club in Major League Baseball. Attendance has fared well in recent years, setting a record of 3,170,184 fans in 2004 and surpassing 3 million in 2005 and 2006, despite its failure to win a National League pennant since 1945 or to win a World Series since 1908.
Now, word on the street, here in Phoenix, is that Jerry Colangelo wants to move home and make the Cubs a "Winner" in just a couple of years, as he did with the Diamondbacks. A two or three year project. So goes the word amongst those that at least pretend to know him.
FOR THE CHILDREN
ReplyDelete'Rat,
Those Head Rollers are just the kind of hard working proto citizens Bush and his acolytes insist should have free roam here and across the border, a path to citizenship, visa cards, free health care, legal rights of citizens, cross border trucking privileges, and etc.
...sometimes makes you wonder what the acolytes on these "right wing blogs" want for the future of this country.
Tater,
ReplyDeleteOur Miss Trish sometimes suffers Tiny Bouts of
"Tourettes Syndrome"
Heavens to Betsy and the Girls!
"Winners, Round One"
ReplyDeleteThat means Hillary and Romney had the most money in one account or the other to see to it that they would become "Winners, Round One"
Half of Romney's doners being pro-life, and half-pro choice, depending on the dates of their contributions.
ReplyDeleteBoy, don't I wish I had more than a Pair of Shorts:
ReplyDelete---
"New Century's shares fell 14.5 cents, or 14 percent, to 91.5 cents at 3:59 p.m. New York time in over-the-counter trading. They've fallen 97 percent this year."
Bigoted Wife:
ReplyDeleteDoug:
4,000 Eunuchs had a convention in India.
Wife: "Oh"
Doug:
What's up with that? They don't have choirs and stuff, do they?
Wife: Huh?
Doug:
You know, choirs of Eunuchs!
Wife: Oh! I thought you meant a UNIX Convention!
(Surprised that INDIANS can afford anything but Linux?)
Huh?
Bobal,
ReplyDeleteIn case no one's answered yet,
Del Shannon.
(courtesy of bigoted wife)
'Rat:
ReplyDelete"Good for the goose and the gander?"
---
Yeah, actually I was thinking only of "us" Nimby Ganders.
Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete"That's it Westhawk, but also the PC war we fight today.
No commander at any time can tolerate any collateral civilian casualties or even too many of the enemy (Highway of Death) because the Media, Congress, and especially Dems will come after them as War Criminals.
The Army essentially takes it's SpecOps guys and makes the moving targets. Unable to shoot back. For fear of killing someone and having witch-hunts. Marines will shoot back having the doctrine to attack the ambush.
What this is all about is if our guys will sit back passively like British Sailors captured by Iran and paraded around so that CYA and PC driven politics in Washington and NYC don't generate the usual Democratic Witch Hunt, or if we will actually, shoot back at people trying to kill us.
Yeah there's interservice rivalries and the Army is stupidly defending it's turf. But the real reason is the fear of the NYT or Senator Levin ending a few Army careers. God knows we can't fight back against people shooting at us. Pictures might show up in the NYT."
"Gal with sexy voice"
ReplyDelete----
Some guys just cannot keep the lust out of their hearts!
---
...a lady does a golf show on the radio here that I'd really like to Meat, er Meet.
Probably looks like Rosie.